Well, I feel privileged, because the one thing that could ever hope to make this movie part watchable is perhaps watching it on the exact day it takes place, that is, April Fool’s Day 2008 lol. If you haven’t seen the original production that this is a remake of, then it’s possible you might get the one-hit kick off it that I seem to remember I might have as an impressionable 11 year old or whatever age I was when I snook a watch of it with my brother many years ago. On the other hand if you have seen the original, then you know how it’s probably the most pointless and stupid cheat of a horror movie ever made, no matter what its cheese value may be.

I’d been misled into thinking this remake had made big changes in the ending and as soon as I got wind of this, clicking around the ‘net as the movie began, I immediately stopped browsing for fear of spoiling the surprise. Unfortunately, aside from an admittedly hilarious genuine jolt, there’s really no change here. It takes a full 38 minutes to really get going – the pacing is way off, everything up the the graveside scene could and should be covered in 20 minutes max – once it’s in the zone, it works as a direct-to-video slasher I guess, but what kind of praise is that? It has a very tacky plastic 90210 shiny TV people feel to it which is strangely appropriate.

I’m a sucker for event-relevant viewing options and coupled with that one little shocker at the end I can’t entirely dismiss it … but, meh, I’ll be going to the ‘86 production on this day in the future …

You probably couldn’t get a more precise blending of The Exorcist and The Omen (and, hey, throw Amityville on the pile too) than this if you literally cut them together lol; and a lot of the production values at best leave a lot to be desired, at worst demand the need for new underwear.

But this holds together well enough with decent performances, a proper old creepysad score reminiscent of Christian Gaubert’s for The Little Girl Who Lives Down the Lane, and, in fact, almost by virtue of those very same production values that will leave a lot of watchers howling. If you’re into obscure 70s horror, you’re in for a treat. Yes, for the second time this evening following certain moments in AVPR, I almost had an accident when Cathy appeared claiming, “My name is Laura” with what can only be described as sh*t smeared on her face in an hilariously awful attempt to mimic Dick Smith’s makeup on The Exorcist that actually manages to outbad Seytan ... but overall, I think it’s some kind of gem to go in the box with the likes of Happy Birthday to Me, Sleepaway Camp II and Slumber Party Massacre II. I should’ve saved it for Halloween, really, but I couldn’t wait.

I had a feeling this would be better a second time, but I don’t know where to begin describing the sensation I felt walking home today. Sometimes, just sometimes, it’s really worth seeing a movie on the largest screen you can find. I’m sure that’s the opposite of what I’ve said elsewhere but hey, I’m saying it.

I had my eyes on Johnny Depp for pretty much the whole movie this time – projected larger than life his performance is even more outstanding than I’d first thought, and though I’d pretty much been swung over to the Daniel Day Lewis camp earlier today seeing some clips from There Will Be Blood, I couldn’t have swung back harder or faster. It’s not just the singing and the face and the accent; what captivated me more than anything here were the full-length shots of Johnny … the way he walks and carries himself, he’s like a silent movie star, it’s all Sweeney and though he’s on the screen almost constantly, I wanted even more of him just standing, brooding.

On occasion my gaze did shift, though, to the other actors; particularly Helena Bonham-Carter, who is also much better than I’d previously thought … watching her just through the “Not While I’m Around” scene, right up to her closing the door on Toby in the bakehouse, is just about as mesmerising and gutwrenching as watching Depp for the rest of the film’s duration.

It is slightly more violent than I’d perceived the first time around (though I’d still stand by what I said about the BBFC – and I was glad to hear Mark Kermode saying much the same a couple of weeks ago on Five Live), but as many have said already, it borders about as much on the ridiculously comic as it’s possible to do without veering completely into nonsense and making a mockery of the rest of the drama; the roll-on effect being that when those crucial deaths occur in the final act, your focus is entirely on the higher meaning of the deaths, and about as far removed from the shower of blood as I think has ever been seen in such a bloody movie.

I didn’t spot Anthony Head’s brief appearance the first time either – it’s truly blink and you’ll miss it, lol. I think he was originally to be one of those who sang “The Ballad of Sweeney Todd” – which I guess I also want to mention again. I’ve grown to love this exclusion – it’s beautiful as underscore and really, as I said in the earlier review, I missed “Kiss Me” much more than anything else. And even that exclusion is still a minor drawback, which along with the slightly hokey, “That’s all very well …” line following “Epiphany” (it’s in the trailer too), is far from enough to counter the fact that this movie is really, quite jawdroppingly, perfect.

7th January, 2008:

NB. I’ve decided to post this now, it’s been sort of hanging back till I see it “properly” ‘cos, as with Rent, my opinion after a first watch felt very muddled but having listened to the soundtrack again the other night, I remembered the one reason I think it really is as good as I wanted it to be and that’s that, basically, it reaches that same crushingly beautiful hollow in the end that I remember from the first time I saw the show / listened to the cast recordings / whatever. I can’t wait to see it again, definitely a birthday present to look forward to
———————-

I can’t begin this review without pointing out how ultimately I couldn’t help but approach it on a first viewing the same way I did the Rent movie. It felt almost like a chore, like, I almost just wanted to get the watching of it “out of the way” so I could watch it again if that makes any sense. I wanted to know what was missing, what was new, what was changed, etc, so I could amend my perspective or whatever to get the most out of it. Subsequent viewings of movies like this will always be more enjoyable than the first for me – I don’t like unpleasant surprises much Not that there are many here, I hasten to add (the clue is in the star rating if I start to sound like I was disappointed).

I guess I’m surprised now having seen it how universal the praise has been. It’s by no means as conventional an adaptation as they could’ve made it, and the cuts are just as unexpected (“Green Finch and Linnet Bird”, to my joy, remains; while “The Ballad” is used only for instrumental underscore). I love how young Toby is now and Ed Sanders, who plays him, is incredible in the part. And while I’m on the supporting cast I may as well mention Sacha Baron Cohen as Pirelli … even more perfect than I imagined he’d be.

Then there’s the gore. I’m baffled and a little annoyed by having just read that it has been rated ‘18’ here in the UK. To me it makes little sense – even if it’d actually been as violent as I’d been led to expect (which it isn’t) ... there is no sex (even the beggar woman’s bawdy taunts are gone – though they’re there on the soundtrack …), no bad language (*edit*: okay, the “s” word but that’s still PG material …), nothing but blood here for the BBFC to be offended by. And though the ‘18’ certificate isn’t quite the kiss of death the NC-17 rating is in the US, I still think that stopping under-18s from seeing a movie like this … I mean it’s Sondheim for heck’s sake … it sends out the wrong message entirely about what the BBFC’s purpose is. I hope a few councils think to overrule it and let a few school trips get in or something.

Of course, I can’t end this review without mentioning Johnny Depp I’d seen bits and pieces of the performance and couldn’t resist sneaking a few tracks of the soundtrack prior to watching the movie, and I knew that the gruff bellowing rage of George Hearn etc was pretty much gone, replaced with Depp’s beautiful but admittedly thin voice. In the context of the whole product, though, there’s far more surprises in his singing than I expected. He actually does come close to the roar of the stage Sweeneys in places, and when he holds the soaring, swooping higher notes, especially alongside Alan Rickman on “Pretty Women”, it’s absolute heaven. The harmonising on the part of the other actors is really impressive too.

See, kind of a flat review and I’m afraid I might sound like I was slightly bored by the movie. Like I said, it was the first look. My anticipation for this movie was massive, I pretty much knew how much I was going to love it. It’s been like a present sitting under the Christmas tree, like I know what it is, I really want it, and now I’ve opened it I’m just looking forward to playing with it again later. If that makes any sense, lol.

One thing I will say is that despite all the buzz etc, and I’ll be continuing my little corner of support for it, I’d be astonished if this was nominated for a lot of Oscars let alone winning any – I keep seeing other hopefuls and just about everytime I find another category I feel Sweeney will be shut out of … even Johnny in the end. It just really doesn’t strike me as that kind of movie, not from any angle I look at it, and there are so many other movies that, no matter what I think, are gonna get a hell of a lot more votes. Like I said – don’t get me wrong, I love it – I’m just kinda surprised that so many other people do too. It seems so grey and grim to me to be getting such love as it is. I feel like they could’ve used the crossover aspects better – the Sondheim fans, the Johnny fans, the gore hounds – they could’ve made it 2 and a half hours, they could’ve really used the Johnnyness, and despite what people are saying .. it could be gorier.

Yes – I’m giving it 5 stars, it’s at the top of my 2007 list, and I’m sitting here saying it could’ve been better, lol. But, like Rent was still “Rent”, y’know: it’s still “Sweeney Todd”. It might not be as definitive a version of the show as I’d hoped for – it feels a little too fast in places jumping from scene to scene (“Kiss Me” would’ve been a particularly helpful inclusion I think towards the end) but it still knocks the socks off anything else seen in the past year. All I can think could be the reason for its success is the thought of those who have never seen or heard of Sweeney Todd. When I think of those people, I almost literally turn green with envy. I guess going into this movie that way, as perhaps many have … that would be a pretty astonishing experience … which is exactly why I’ll be taking the family for my birthday “thing” in February

I feel the need to clarify something I’ve whined about recently and here seems like the perfect place to do it, and it regards those movies that are nothing but technically impressive. The ones where the first thing you find yourself mentioning is how “beautifully shot” they are or how marvelous the visual effects were or how great the music was etc. I said that if you find yourself mentioning things like this before anything else, it’s probably not really a great movie. I guess that was a little harsh. What I should’ve said is, if you’re gonna make a movie like that, your name had better be Julie Taymor.

This is actually a lot more like Across the Universe than I remembered it, obviously not in story or anything, but inasmuch as its noble failings. The one shot I remembered from the first (and last) time I watched was of course that of Lavinia in the open plain following her disfigurement, the sticks on the end of her arms reaching out for her uncle as blood issues from her mouth over the camera. It’s still one of the most extraordinary images I’ve ever seen, and it’s not the only one to behold in these few hours.

After I’d first seen it, this scene and what follows made me think Laura Fraser’s performance was a lot better than it really is. In fact, it’s only as the mute that she really impresses me now – in the first half of the movie, her performance kind of collapses each time she opens her mouth, something in the way she delivers the Shakespeare lines that just gives away how lost she is amongst heavyweights like Hopkins and Lang.

And that’s kind of the movie’s problem too – luckily, the wobbly stuff here is mostly confined to the first half of the movie, prior to the scene where Lavinia is brought back to Titus. It’s also, it must be said, never quite as wobbly as the stuff in Across the Universe. The “everyplace, everytime” set-up jars about as often as it works – it’s at its best when the 20s jazz-style score sets up the travelling circus-like reveal of the heads of Titus’ sons, a moment that just about makes the many times it falls flat worth it. Alan Cumming jars almost every time he’s onscreen – but he’s Alan Cumming, so that too can be forgiven.

Ultimately, this is absolutely the movie to show disinterested kids to show them that Shakespeare’s anything but boring. Even I still now have to stop in places during this and ask myself, is this really Shakespeare, lol? Really? Reaaalllly?!?? The casting of Anthony Hopkins is almost cheeky; he of course is pretty much just Lecter again in the movie’s last hour or so. Do I care? Not a bit. This is one of the greatest revenge stories ever told – of course, I’d almost entirely forgotten the Sweeney Todd connection here, too, which extends far beyond meat pies – and Julie Taymor turned it into one of the greatest Shakespeare adaptations ever put onscreen. Right now, I think it’s second only to Branagh’s Hamlet in my mind.

As this got underway, I found myself of course wondering if I hadn’t already seen it earlier in the day in the form of Outlaw. The set-up is similar, and of course, there’s Danny Dyer.

Actually, I ultimately found it quite a neat blending of something like Outlaw and, with the presence of Gillian Anderson, what I missed in Outlaw that The Brave One had to offer. I was surprised to find I liked Danny Dyer in Outlaw, and the same was true here; I love Gillian Anderson, of course; and despite the very clearcut masculine-feminine thing here (the women quite literally leave the movie for “somewhere safe” before horrible manly things happen), I found it much better than the reviews I’ve read. Clocking in at little over 70 minutes, it’s easily worth that just for Anderson’s performance, but there’s plenty more to get into too.

I seem to remember there was something in the marketing of this movie that made me pretty uneasy, and led me to expect something very different to what it ultimately is. They funded it in part from Nick Love fans making donations in exchange for “inside info” and the chance to be an extra. There was something about it that felt very mobbish, leading me to expect a movie that pandered to the kind of people who read the Daily Mail and attack the homes of paediatricians, nevermind paedophiles. That Chris Morris Jam opening comes to mind of the guy pointing at the front page of a tabloid with an expression of disgust at the toerag pictured only to realise, oh dear, he is that toerag.

But I’ve gotta say, I was pleasantly surprised. Though the movie does at times go a little too simple – there’s one moment where my heart sank, as Sean Bean gathers the disparate, downtrodden characters in a gymnasium and addresses them, explaining that they’re not just out for personal revenge, they’re gonna get “ALL the paedophiles, ALL the scum … BLAIR!” and the movie threatens to turn into nothing but a British wanna be Fight Club. It gets past that stage though, and while it’s certainly no Brave One, not to mention my feelings on the misuse of the dreaded P-word (which I won’t get into at this time of year) ... considering my expectations I was fairly shocked by how atypically masculine a movie it turns out to be. The technical stuff’s pretty flawless, too.

Though I’ve really loved a few of Neil Jordan’s movies – The End of the Affair in particular, Interview with the Vampire of course … looking at his filmography now I realise I’ve actually missed quite a few, lol – I really came to this expecting nothing more than the latest perfect Jodie Foster performance. This used to be an event, of course, in the decade leading up to Panic Room a Jodie movie was really a Jodie Movie. Now, she almost religiously gets Oscar buzz on a yearly basis (no luck yet), and like Dakota Fanning, Johnny Depp – I’m sure there are others – more often than not, the greatness of the performance is almost “boringly” so.

But this performance honestly surprised me. Foster is known for playing strong women, of course, and her roles have almost without exception always had something powerful to say about women, about the treatment, the history, the everything of women. It’s almost bizarre to find her in this movie once you find out what kind of movie it is. I read recently about how upset she’d been by Sin City and I totally got where she was coming from, but there are many ways in which The Brave One is not so different from that comic book burst of ultraviolence. What makes Foster’s performance so surprising is the weakness she manages to show us at times. It’s a revenge movie, so of course there’s still a lot of strength. It’s called The Brave One, d’uh. But it’s the other, quieter stuff – the way she approaches the police desk after first getting the courage to leave her apartment at the start, for instance – that really made an impression on me.

There are moments here where I had to actually double check that it wasn’t based on a graphic novel or comic, in fact – the moment, for instance, where her “voiceover” first creeps in as she leaves the subway, “Why aren’t my hands shaking? Why does nobody stop me?” It practically reminded me of an old Incredible Hulk cartoon I used to watch on a loop, “Dizzy, shaky. Unable … to … stand …” It’s almost like she’s literally transforming superhero style into this other person she is in the end (“Superc*nt” – no don’t close the window, that’s the movie’s word, not mine – would almost be the perfect title, in fact). But though I’d struggle to say the movie is necessarily dark – on the contrary, it revels in its near-schlockiness just about wherever it possibly can – it’s certainly more interested in showing how affected – and, ultimately, irredeemably destroyed – Foster’s character is by every act of violence. And that’s the giant hairline than separates it from the far less reverent Sin City.

Anyway, like I said, I was amazed to find it really wasn’t just the Jodie that thrilled me in this movie. It’s every bit as absorbingly intense emotionally as I found The End of the Affair. It’s one of those movies that just fired its harpoon of interest directly into the center of my forehead and never let me go. At almost 2 hours in length, that’s really no mean feat. There’s just so much here that can only improve on subsequent viewings. There are so many things that really shouldn’t work, so many conveniences and contrivances – quite literally, the shooting in the convenience store, then the trust Foster shows following a stranger into a back alley to get a gun – but they’re all smoothed over effortlessly by what I can only assume is a Disbelief Suspension Device that Jodie Foster has concealed somewhere on her person at all times on set.

My mum said afterwards how Foster looks much as she did in The Accused. I said, yeh, and I’m sure that’s how a lot of people, possibly even Jodie, hoped that movie would end. It’s basically that movie meets Taxi Driver, Iris all grown up and doing the Travis Bickle thing – with the prostitute in the taxi, it’s almost a direct lift. It honestly amazes me that I haven’t heard more people going crazy about how basically dangerous this movie is etc, like Daily Mail types who said David Cronenberg’s Crash was gonna bring down society etc. This in itself probably says more than the movie itself does about how much morals have crumbled in just a decade. Even I found myself during this movie, even as I was quietly cheering Jodie on, thinking, “but … dude!” But what finally made me love this movie the most is how it genuinely takes no prisoners. It goes all the way, right or wrong. It delivers, which is more than can be said of at least 80% of the movies I’ve seen this year.